On the recordNovember 29, 2011
let me also thank our friend from Colorado for his contributions to the committee. He is a valuable member of our committee, and he is no less valuable because he is offering an amendment with which I happen to disagree. Two quick factual points. One is, the language the Senator mentioned from section 1033 is exactly the same language as was in last year's bill and is in current law. The only difference is we have given greater flexibility this year to the President by making it waiveable. So our language is more flexible than the current law. Finally, in terms of the Hamdi case, the Senator is correct. I believe it was Senator Udall who said this was an American citizen who was captured in Afghanistan. That is true. But the Supreme Court, in Hamdi, relied on the Quirin case--which was an American citizen captured on Long Island and--quoted that case with approval when saying: There is no bar to this Nation's holding one of its own citizens as an enemy combatant. That was the Quirin language--an American citizen captured on Long Island. Mr. President, if I have any time left, I will yield it and yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, the pending amendment is the Udall amendment. Am I correct, I ask the chairman, in that we would intend, depending on--there are several things that have to be resolved--but we would intend to have this vote at around 2:15 p.m., if things work out? Is that correct?





